Here's a surprise, while we wait for Joe Boyd's anticipated book about World Music, Louise Gray has jumped in with this neat little summary, managing to fit everything she wants to say into 160 small pages.

Her approach is to take many of the artists who have surfaced as stars in the world music sky and look back to their origins in fado, rembetika and other long-established traditional genres of regional popular music. The emphasis is very Europe-oriented. As far as I can see (skipping through the text and checking the index), there's no reference to Franco, Tabu Ley, African Jazz, Les Bantous de la Capitale and that whole vitally important genre of Central African pop from the Congo aka Zaire (neither of which are mentioned in the index). Fela Kuti is mentioned once (only in the sense that he can be safely categorised as 'world Music') but there's no space for Nigerian band-leaders King Sunny Ade, Ebenezer Obey or Victor Uwaifo. The more you look for, the less you find.

After a while, the reader begins to wonder, who is this for, what is its point? Is it simply to establish that there had been much great music in the rest of the world long before the term world music was coined? That is a point worth making, but it is not sufficient to carry a book whose title suggests it is a guide. The topic has been covered so brilliantly well in the Rough Guide to World Music, why produce such an unsatisfactory and insubstantial rival?

I thought it was a good read. Refreshingly free of the route of recommending albums, instead a series of themed chapters that delve at depth into certain genres in a thoughtful and wide ranging way - what were the social & historical backgrounds, why is this music like it is, and what does it mean when Western consumers buy it, and more importantly 'buy into it' as something of significance to them ?
The chapter on fado and rembetika is particularly good.
I'd recommend it, and it's easy to pick up cheap.

True. The New Internationalist mag carries some good music reviews by Louise Gray, and have published this book by her as part of their "No-Nonsense Guides" series : hence the shoehorned title, for what is really a collection of interesting themed articles.

What a shame you haven't really read the book, Charlie. Skipping through the text and reading the index doesn't really count.

If you had read it properly you would have realised that a guide doesn't have to an encyclopaedic work. And in 160 pages of pocketbook how could it, or should it? I work for the New Internationalist and even I as a publisher don't see this book as a competitor to the Rough Guide, rather an neat complement.

Many people and genres could not be mentioned by name, again because of space restrictions, so instead Louise has chosen themes through which different aspects of world music can be explored. The music on the margins chapter is a perfect example of this - in describing fado and rembetika she could have been telling the stories of how countless other sounds have developed.

A more thorough read might perhaps have reversed your verdict - that the No-Nonsense Guide reaches parts of world music that the Rough Guide has not?

danrb wrote:Skipping through the text and reading the index doesn't really count.

I confess to be unduly influenced by titles.

I had the same difficulty with Elijah Wald's book, misleadingly titled How the Beatles Destroyed Rock 'n' Roll, which is not the theme of even one chapter, still less of the whole book.

I take 'guide' literally, expecting to be led to most parts of the world, musically. As I have said, I wanted to like it more, but was not clear of its overall purpose. If it is not a guide, what is it, a provocation to think? Well that would be fine, but it needs to suggest something like in its name. To call it a guide while leaving so many important musical regions undiscussed is like having an atlas with several countries missing, or a road map without several major routes.

Anyway, I am satisfied that this thread has led to others supporting the book without reservations - I certainly don't want to discourage people from reading it more properly than I have found time to do. But I do still need a better clue as to what it is about and who is it for.

Charlie wrote:Anyway, I am satisfied that this thread has led to others supporting the book without reservations - I certainly don't want to discourage people from reading it more properly than I have found time to do. But I do still need a better clue as to what it is about and who is it for.

Some answers, maybe, in the Fly Podcast that features Louise Gray in conversation with Damian Rafferty.

Thanks for the link Con. Despite having found the book worthwhile, this podcast didn't imo cover any ground that hasn't been raked many times, and for most people here, I doubt there is much of interest. I did like the 'ecstatic communion' phrase at the end.
The Fly podcasts definitely look worth keeping tabs on, maybe some have more detail, depth of interest, humour or quirk.